Sitting superstars with foul trouble

Someone please explain to me the logic behind sitting a superstar who gets
into foul trouble late in the game. When a game is over, you total up all
the points, and whichever team scored more wins. However it may seem, a
point scored with five minutes remaining counts as much as a point scored
with five seconds remaining. If you sit a superstar because of foul trouble,
bring him in later and he does not in fact foul out, you've lost however
many more minutes he might have played before fouling out, than if you'd
simply left him in.

The only reasons I can think of seem weak:

- "Great players have the ability to elevate their games at the end, when
they know exactly what needs to be accomplished to win, so you need them
then." I'm not convinced this belief really holds water. Did Michael Jordan
really make a higher percentage of his shots with five seconds left than the
rest of the game? I'll bet not.

- "A player in foul trouble will play too conservatively, unless he knows
there's only a couple of minutes left in the game." I don't believe this
either. In Game 2, Shaq sat down with five fouls, the Pistons went on a run,
and then he played the rest of regulation and all of overtime without
fouling out. Why not just let him play on?

- "You need to sit a player with five fouls to get his head straight." Fine.
Do it for a minute, explain the situation and put him back in.

humbubba@smart.net
>Someone please explain to me the logic behind sitting a superstar who gets
>into foul trouble late in the game. When a game is over, you total up all
>the points, and whichever team scored more wins. However it may seem, a
>point scored with five minutes remaining counts as much as a point scored
>with five seconds remaining. If you sit a superstar because of foul trouble,
>bring him in later and he does not in fact foul out, you've lost however
>many more minutes he might have played before fouling out, than if you'd
>simply left him in.
>
>The only reasons I can think of seem weak:
>
>- "Great players have the ability to elevate their games at the end, when
>they know exactly what needs to be accomplished to win, so you need them
>then." I'm not convinced this belief really holds water. Did Michael Jordan
>really make a higher percentage of his shots with five seconds left than the
>rest of the game? I'll bet not.
>
>- "A player in foul trouble will play too conservatively, unless he knows
>there's only a couple of minutes left in the game." I don't believe this
>either. In Game 2, Shaq sat down with five fouls, the Pistons went on a run,
>and then he played the rest of regulation and all of overtime without
>fouling out. Why not just let him play on?
>
>- "You need to sit a player with five fouls to get his head straight." Fine.
>Do it for a minute, explain the situation and put him back in.
>
>
>

I agree, but maybe the rationale is avoiding the mental hit of a star
fouling out.


Rick Hohensee
Precision Mojo Engineer